amarante

Bankruptcy appears to be inevitable. There is no claim by Girardi that he doesn't owe the money. If he had the ability to pay the money and meet other monetary obligations, he would have done so rather than have the house of cards collapse. Clearly the divorce was intended to shield assets in some way. Whether it was Erika leaving a sinking ship or the both of them conspiring who knows. Girardi has no ability to earn money at this point. He will be disbarred but even but that is irrelevant. He is an 83 year old whose lifestyle depending on his rainmaking abilities in terms of getting large class action lawsuits. Obviously that gravy train left the station a few year ago and so he was wildly juggling plates in an attempt to keep things afloat. What will be litigated will be getting at his assets and what those assets are and where he has hidden them. In general you are shielded from personal financial liability if you incorporate which Girardi did as he owns LLC (Limited Liability Corporations). However, the "corporate shield" (i.e. protection) can be demolished if you don't act or do act in certain ways. It is very likely that this will occur so that the corporate financial shenanigans will cause Girardi and Erika to become personally liable. I would imagine the Pasadena home might still have some equity in it and somehow Erika is still getting an income stream from somewhere so that she is supporting what is a fairly lavish lifestyle - isn't she in a $7000 condo which isn't as lavish as a mansion but still isn't a chicken shack even in Los Angeles.

Assets have been frozen as a Federal Court is pretty serious. I assume the firm suing Girard knows where some of the *assets* are but of course the question is what are the assets available since there doesn't seem to be any money to meet payroll and how well has Girard hidden assets. Evidently the Girard firm has been running a giant Ponzi scheme and it caught up as Girard probably lost his rainmaking ability so large class action suits dried up. He would be criminally liable because embezzlement is a crime - as well as grounds for disbarment. It is probably the most basic ethical breach an attorney can do aside from breaching privilege. Ericka would not have criminal liability for the embezzlement since she would have had nothing to do with how the firm managed its fund - or at least nothing provable. It is odd that Tom's lawyers are pleading mental incompetency since it is a fairly low bar and wouldn't be any defense against the civil action for the money which is what Tom and Ericka care about. There is not any way that Tom is going to jail - even if he eventually was found guilty or pled guilty (as most Federal criminal cases do), he will either be dead or be so infirm at that point that they will give him some form of probation. And losing the lifestyle is what will really hurt them. Obviously Ericka sought to protect assets by filing for divorce but I don't see how that maneuver really helps. Whatever assets that would theoretically be paid for alimony or split of assets would be used to pay off the amounts due and it does't seem as if there are funds available. Again, they could be hiding funds somewhere offshore but it seems as though if Tom actually had $3,000,000 off shore he would have used it to make this go away rather than have it explode in this way. Ericka actually might wind up owing alimony to Tom since she has a relatively high income and Tom has no visible means of support since he can't practice law and he is 83. He would get Social Security and I think that one's retirement funds are safe from judgment - at least they were for OJ. But Erika wouldn't be able to support her lifestyle on her BRAVO salary even augmented by her side promotions and ventures. I can't imagine she could be on the show and not have this a part of the storyline even if she deflects by saying she can't discuss legal matters.

I haven't seen doorless bathrooms with exposed toilets. My experience is the the 1970's style where the sink and often the closet are exposed and the shower and toilet are in a separate little room. I think that it theoretically enables one to have a smaller footprint. What I am seeing in the International version are bathrooms which have a large glass wall so that if you are on the toilet or in the shower you are completely exposed to the bedroom and theoretically if the drapes are open in the bedroom - to the outside world. I don't even understand why one would want a glass wall. I live in apartments where the bathrooms don't have windows so it's not as if a bathroom needs natural light. I thought one was an aberration but then it popped up again in another country.

The changes made to the Ventura condo were astoundingly bad and didn't do a single thing to remedy the issues. Painting bathroom tiles BLACK - painting tiles is bad enough but black. And painting wood kitchen cabinets is expensive and/or a PITA if DIY because you can't just slap a coat of paint on them because they walk look terrible and crack and chip almost immediately. And leaving the light fixture in the kitchen AND the white tile. They would have been better off changing the light fixture and stopping there because at least wood cabinets and white tile are durable and don't look as discordant as what is probably a slap dash paint job. And why do people look at bedrooms and say it is good for a nursery. Unless the people well and truly plan to move out after they have children, the bedroom will be theoretically used for children - how is a room okay for children but not for a nursery. The only time this observation makes any kind of space is when there is some kind of small annex off the *master* bedroom 🙂 which is convenient when you need an infant near you for night feedings or whatever.

I thought all of the Montana condos were pretty terrible for the price. I was expecting something higher end or unusual in some way. I wonder whether it reflects the demographics of people buying a condo in Bozeman. At one of the developments, the realtor mentioned that it was close to the university so perhaps that is the market buying them. I would assume that most people deliberately living in a place like Wyoming would want a single family home - preferably one not jammed in with neighbors. Just seems odd. And those condos were all so sad. They looked like the equivalent of quonset hut housing and the interiors weren't particularly outstanding either.

I don’t give a rat’s patootie about someone’s sexual orientation. I am not shocked or appalled that Jacob wants to dress in drag. I just don’t think it is the wisest move to use it as a storyline on a reality television show. I don’t think he will be bullied or whatever in school and I don’t think Jacob particularly cares if at school he doesn’t hang with the football sorority boring crowd. I just think it is exploitative and poor parenting to use any minors as a storyline because it will follow them the rest of their lives and not because there is a stigma attached to gay or trans but because NO adolescent should have to showcase their lives on television except in the most superficial way. There is a reason why the wisest celebrity parents go to great lengths to AVOID having their kids’ private lives exposed in any manner.

Like almost everyone I find Elizabeth's statements to be confusing and obviously intended to present a fake image. While I understand why it might have been necessary to not discuss specifics of the divorce while it was on-going it certainly wasn't necessary to be actively deceptive rather than just *discreet*. I had assumed that Elizabeth had a long term marriage to the ex and to the extent I thought about it, assumed she was equivalent to Sutton from Beverly Hills - e.g. that she had married a guy when they were both relatively young. Boy was I wrong and boy does the reality not comport with the smoke screen she is weaving. She was some kind of cocktail waitress when she met the MUCH OLDER man - just the same as any other regulation gold digger. His first wife was more of less a childhood sweetheart - married when he was poor and had three children. And then divorced. Elizabeth was only married to him in 2012 and divorce proceedings started in 2017 - this is so NOT the kind of relationship she continues to spin. Am I the only person who assumed this was a long term relationship? In general it is not uncommon for older men marrying trophies to NOT want children from the trophy marriage and to have a prenup in place - seems as though she was attempting to go beyond the terms of the prenup. And the divorce settlement seems fairly generous for someone with a five year marriage and no kids. She is getting $31,000 per month but that sum also specifically includes the $11,000 mortgage on the beach house as well as the lease payments on the Bentley and Rolls - why is it that these fake rich people have leases on cars. So $360,000 a year in alimony paid until she dies or remarries. With alimony (unlike child support) she pays taxes. It's a nice amount but it doesn't make her obscenely wealthy - taxes on the beach house (for example) would be at least $2000 per month. I posted this exposition because the reality stands in such stark comparison with the narrative and image she presented. Even with all the inconsistencies, she was consistent about purporting to have been in a long term marriage and was absolutely emotionally crushed yada yada yada. Am I being cynical to just believe that she is your run of the mill gold digger who was replaced by a shinier trophy and is now *crushed* because the prenup provided her with a nice but not extravagant amount after the divorce.

These women - with the exception of Gina and Emily - are just loathsome. Of all the housewives, Gina obviously had it the most difficult and Emily seems to have adjusted with a sense of proportion - recognizing that quarantine for her (and other affluent people) was not the horror that others realistically have to endure - nice surroundings and plenty of money so they don't have to worry about supporting their family. Elizabeth by continuing to proclaim that she no longer cares about money - yes right. And I knew after her first proclamation about BigPharma that she would continue to have conspiracist theories about Covid. Braunwynne is one of the most seriously disturbed housewives there has ever been and she should be terminated. Watching her "alcoholic" voyage was bad enough but now we are asked to watch a person who has engaged in domestic violence who also appears to have neglected her children and continues to treat them in a neglectful and abusive manner. I am down with letting children be proud of their identity but I don't think a responsible caring parent would allow their child to have being a bad drag queen by a storyline on a reality show. Let him act out where the video won't follow him the rest of his life - what person wants their adolescent escapades haunting them for the rest of their life? And Kelly continues to remain a loathsome excuse for a human being. No one was flying across the country and leaving their minor children behind. And knowing who her significant other is and what he and others were actively promulgating about the virus at the time - god's way of thinning the herd indeed.

This was an interesting read on how screwy and inconsistent masks and social distancing have been treated on various shows. As I posted, it is such a distraction because I am trying I am left to wonder whether it is part of the plot or character or reflecting that there is theoretically a pod or just completely at the whim of whoever is directing. https://www.vulture.com/article/network-tv-masks-covid-stories.html#_ga=2.199094063.1262402636.1607115178-400200019.1599621172 The article discussed various shows but this part relating to SVU specifically. Law & Order: SVU is fairly typical, as network procedurals in 2020 go. COVID appears quickly in the season’s premiere episode — the cold open is a play on the Central Park birdwatcher incident, and everyone in the scene is either wearing a mask or has one around their necks. Masked officers show up to deal with the confrontation, but when Olivia Benson and other SVU regulars appear, they remove their masks before questioning the people involved. It’s an outdoor scene so it doesn’t feel all that remarkable, except that when the regulars then appear together inside the squad room, no masks appear. Two scenes later, two SVU detectives question an emergency room physician while masked, but the doctor they’re speaking to takes off his mask and face shield. There’s an impressive amount of hygiene theater. Temperatures are taken and hand sanitizer gets squirted. But then, Benson and Carisi walk into an interrogation room and have a long conversation with a suspect while taking zero precautions. Next, Kat and Rollins question a bartender inside his bar, with nary a mask to be seen. In general, the assumption seems to be that COVID is worth worrying about, but it’s not transmissible between characters with speaking roles or anywhere inside the precinct

There wouldn’t be any other way to make sure a transfer had the necessary skills and understood protocols of the new department. That Story is so mind boggling that I have seen it done on several true crime shows. I found it interesting to see how the different shows had different takes on it. I love FF but when I have seen some of their shows done on other shows they are fleshed out because focus isn’t solely forensics.

I just saw the cancer survivor moving to Arizona episode. Do people actually buy homes centered around one day? Whatever but I genuinely didn't understand their final choice. The backyard was objectively terrible even if it backed up to a pond. What in the world do you do with a pond - it wasn't particularly scenic. And it really didn't make sense to move into a home that needed the kind of massive renovation they *claim* they will be doing because living in a house during that kind of renovation isn't possible - why would you set yourself up for that. Made no sense that they wanted to move in for Christmas and THEN do the renovations. I bet their budget wasn't as high as they claimed because if they truly were willing to spend up to $1 million that third house was the best one.

Well for starters they need to keep their leads with storylines. But the reality is that during the height of the pandemic, there were no elective surgeries and there were articles on how even theoretically necessary procedures were down because people were avoiding seeing doctors or going to the hospital unless there was absolutely no alternative. Since COVID was such an unknown (and still is to some extent) any doctor would theoretically be called in to handle the overflowing cases. So many patients and overtaxed hospital facilities.

LIke others I am finding the inconsistencies with mask usage to be completely distracting because I can't figure out the rationale for when they are used or not used except that they aren't used whenever a lead actor is speaking. In what planet are people without masks screaming at each other six inches away. This was especially odd for an episode which was theoretically dealing with people who were careless about following best public health advice. Why not just make an announcement that for the purposes of this season pandemic doesn't exist. The Good Doctor did this and it made it much more coherent.

I think Madrid women said she was divorced when she was thirty so I assume she was in her mid-30's by the time she managed to do everything necessary to change careers; get a job and move. I didn't mind her as her requests seemed more or less what was available in her price point. The realtor didn't think she was totally fixed on that price since everything he showed her was just a bit above and was technically two bedrooms. I know she has to make negative comments for the theoretically suspense but I found her fake carping about the lack of bedroom door to be funny because it really doesn't matter if you have a bedroom door if you have friends crashing in the living room - but then I lived in a studio with a loft overlooking the sofa people would crash on. Nobody expected privacy when they were sleeping. And had a bedroom in a college apartment for a semester which only have a curtain across it. The only absolute veto would be an apartment with the only bathroom in the bedroom because not only do casual guests have to troop through your bedroom to pee but overnight guests have to deal with coming into your bedroom if they need to use the toilet while you are asleep. Again not so much for privacy but just very awkward to actually invade someone's bedroom while they were sleeping.

I assumed that she was going from a small department to a larger metropolitan department. I can't imagine someone from a small fire department would have the same equipment, protocol that would exist for a larger place. There was an arsonist in California who was on the arson squad as it turned out. He had applied to be a fireman in several departments starting with Los Angeles but was rejected but finally wound up in the Glendale fire department. They had lower standards especially - obviously for him - in terms of the psychological tests they gave him.

My family used to rent a house on Long Beach Island so to a vacation on the shore means that one is a few houses away from the ocean. I don't get the allure of a house on a canal. Can you even swim in one of those canals. I would be worried about pollution. The pricing of those canal houses reflects their relative lack of desirability as houses that are close to the beach would be three or four times the price for a relatively modest beach house. The one we would rent for two weeks each summer was just a tiny bungalow - I am not sure it was even three bedrooms. That the guy was seriously contemplating renting it to people who would stuff in eight people is somewhat amazing as that would probably be the serious party crowd. I guess they just hang out in the backyard and drink for the week. My understanding is that the market for housing in Atlantic City is pretty dismal as was the house they looked at in that place. Add that to the shock of small closets - no master bath or a small en suite and other revelations by people who obviously think vintage is anything before 2000. I remember when my aunt moved to a new house in the suburbs and her house was the epitome of what I thought was gracious living. It had an en suite which I had never even heard of before but looking back it was a toilet, a small vanity and a small shower.

I don't disagree that she obviously knew about the lawsuits. I just meant that she wasn't involved in running the law firm practice so she wasn't blatantly involved in the fraud until relatively recently. That to me is different than Dorit who has obviously known about her husband's frauds and scans for the duration since she is involved with them - unlike a law firm practice.

I think it depends on the housewife. I doubt Ericka knew about the financial shenanigans in her husband's law firm until fairly recently when they decided to shield assets by going through a fake divorce. I think Dorit is completely in cahoots with her husband since she has been faking it from the beginning by claiming they owned the house and she doesn't strike me as stupid enough to not know what ownership of the house is. She also appears to have her own shady business going so like attracts like.

That is theoretically true about wigs (and plastic surgery) but very blatant wigs and extensions don't seem to be the aesthetic these women are aiming for. I am not faulting the flamboyant styles but they are completely unrealistic - and I say this as someone who has waist length hair that is so thick that hairdressers have always commented about it and it is an actual problem in terms of styling it. But it doesn't resemble any of the hair on this show. And I am not saying the wigs and extensions on this show are BAD - just that they are unrealistically opulent. Now Brandi's hair is both obvious and ugly as it isn't particularly styled but is just choppy and unrealistically long and thick.

And that’s when the dynamic changed because now Karen is supporting them from Housewives and all of the promotional opportunities.

That uncomfortable scene with the Gizelle and her daughters removed any doubt as to whether the reconciliation with Jamal is real. The girls were so obviously uncomfortable with having to pretend this was really happening. Very poor mothering to put her daughters through that kind of a farce for the sake of a storyline. And why do housewives continue to deny they said or did something when it is clearly captured on camera. There was no ambivalence of need to interpret what Karen said - She had not invited Monique. I assumed that Candiace dodged a bullet since Karen was planning to create some sort of drama by having Candiace and Monique show up at the same time. I imagine she was trying to get Monique out because the timing didn't work as it would have happened DURING the event as opposed to before the event so she could have the drama AND the opening. And can I add that the wig line opening was just sad. Clearly Dr. Hair was just cutting (no pun intended) Karen in on a percentage of wigs sold that he had already designed and was manufacturing. But to call the showing of a few wigs that the guy already had in stock in his small non-posh salon was rather sad. Except for Karen wearing wigs, what expertise does she have in terms of the business - sourcing wigs and distributing them in any kind of mass quantities that would make it a profitable business.

I think the circumstances would depend on whether it is a hired driver as is the case when the HW are driven to affairs. The laws assume that if one is drinking in a car as a non-paying passenger, it is difficult to differentiate from the driver. People drink in limos and other chauffeured cars all the time. Many of them have bars in the back as part of the amenities.

I would think it is relative as from what she has described of her married lifestyle, it was a private jets from a lifestyle supported by multi-multi millions. Elizabeth will go to a merely "rich" lifestyle because there is a huge difference between living the way she was able to in marriage where literally money was no object for anything and only having a few million. She would still be rich by most people's standards. Not that I liked Shannon's first house but that was a much more expensive home than the one she currently *rents*. It's not just the purchase price although obviously 10 or 15 million for a home is a lot but it's also the taxes; the insurance; the maintenance, the staff which would be required for that home - let alone multiple homes in different locations. Just water in Southern California can be thousands a month for a large property with lots of landscaping.

The cameras don't follow them into the AA meeting and don't even film outside the meeting place so they wouldn't be a distraction in terms of HW or compromise anonymity in any way - i.e. it's not like when they film at a restaurant and the cameras are inside the restaurant as well as outside. I think one of the housewives said that a school was shut and I believe the renewal vow was shut on March 10 which was just before California locked down completely. The Bay Area locked down a week earlier. So at the time of the renewal vow, most people were aware that it was a huge big deal because the news was filled with hospitals in NYC as well as Italy overflowing,

Actually people like her did kill people and still do kill people. If you believe COVID is like the flu or a hoax or will disappear when Trump is out of office or any other of the insane theories, you are not likely to take the measures that are recommended by knowledgeable scientists. Also anyone who trots out an argument that BigPharma is behind it as a scheme to make money selling vaccines is anti-vaxxer because that is the misinformation they spread about every vaccine. And those who don't vaccinate are potentially responsible for loss of life. With COVID they added an additional wrinkle about Bill Gates and Soros making money with Gates having chips installed. Anyone who was spouting this at ANY time is hooked into the vast network of nutty conspiracy theory. Ironically these disinformation campaigns are super spreaders of misinformation. If you become infected with COVID you will infect others and some of those will die or have severe complications even if you personally don't suffer. I don't know about Elizabeth but Kelly continued to spread misinformation during the period when it was clear to any sane individual that the pandemic needed to be taken seriously. She even talked about how it was just thinning the herd. By the time this was taped, most of the people I was friends with knew that a shit storm was about the happen and weren't minimizing the implications.